Category: Innovation (technologicallly driven)

Fintech: Babble-fork

Coining (pun not even intended as I wrote this — lame non-landing anyway) a new phrase: Babble-fork.
Which is what happens now in the financial industry with fintech:

Banks et al. think they have a role to play in the applications of blockchain technology in the financial industry of the future.
As bc is just a distributed ledger technology [ref. Tapscott the Elder & the Younger], right?
Obviously, dead wrong. Or, ‘the Internet’ is just phone lines between mainframes.

Otherhandly, the start-ups that have no role or place for the incumbents. The start-ups that expect the old ones to die [1:03 of the linked]… and then, it is already a mockery of a flattery to relate the financial industry-that-was with that commander that never made it to captain (Navy); an outright self-delusion of the grandest scale when such industrialists think they’ll still be able to catch up with the innovation tidal waves already rushing to their shores (unseen, over still deep seas until reaching their shallow tropical beach sides ..!).
Since bc is the very counterpoint of centralized (‘trusted third party’-, quod non par excellence!) trust, being the utter distribution of it hence contra anything however remotely approaching the delusion of importance that may still be with the traditionalists.

So, fintech forks ferociously for the financial future as a tenable alliteration runs only so long. But you get it. Time again to ask for the entry password — with the wrong answer leading to …?

Well then, I also have for you:
20160408_151402
[Dear Lord. In the Attick; Ams]

Said, not enough

Here’s a trope worth repeating: Humans are / aren’t the weakest link in your InfoSec.

Are, because they are fickle, demotivated, unwilling, lazy, careless, (sometimes! but that suffices) inattentive, uninterested in InfoSec but interested in (apparently…) incompatible goals.

Are, because you make them a single point of failure, or the one link still vulnerable and through their own actual, acute, risk management and weighing, decide to evade the behavioral limitations set by you with your myopic non-business-objectives-aligned view on how the (totalitarian dehumanized, inhumane) organisation should function.

Aren’t, because the human mind (sometimes) picks up the slightest cues of deviations, is inquisitive and resourceful, flexible.

Aren’t, because there’s so many other equally or worse weak links to take care of first. Taking care of the human factor may be the icing, but the cake would be very good to perfect for making the icing worthwhile…!

Any other aspects ..? Feel free to add.

If you want to control ‘all’ of information security, humans should be taken out of the (your!) loop, and you should steer clear of theirs (for avoiding accusations of interference with business objectives achievement, or actually interfering without you noticing since your viewpoint is so narrow).

That being said, how ’bout we all join hands and reach for the rainbow ..? Or so, relatively speaking. And:
DSC_0404
[Where all the people are; old Reims opera (?)]

Is it New (enough) ..?

After bemusement and annoyance with all Pokesheeple (They think trespassing (or worse) is OK in some game hunt? Preventative (hospital) detention is on order — no-one of their abilities is too stupid to not have to just stick to the law ..!), and the business model of selling simpleton crowd control to e.g., shopping malls has come out of the closet, my question is: How new is that ..?

Seriously; is it an ‘innovation’ that isn’t recognized (yet) as such, or is it a minor application of some other one’s idea ..? What (hopefully (??), non-game tied) variants can we expect in the near future ..? Or will we devolve into a real-life GTA game nation, with some 0,1%ers pulling all the strings?

Leaving you with this dystopian twist, but serious about the question before that, and with:
20141027_131258_HDR
[Upside-down Voorburg]

~vergent predictions, Do or Don’t

This idea, or lack of it, crossed my mind:
When it comes to predictions, following the lead of Tetlock’s Superforecasters may very well work (though note much of it starts with the, sort-of, mental, 50-50 approach of soberly realizing that one may improve, by admitting imprecision and those that claim precision or high scoring rates are wrong) … for issues and questions that converge on one, somewhat exactly determinable, outcome. This, all being within the realm of said book which is very much recommended by the way.
Where some questions, like “What is the best strategy?” may not have such a single outcome; the world changes, and (business-like) having a vision is a grand prediction already. Let alone that the ‘mission’, one’s desired place in that vision of how the world will be in the future, (often / always without a miss) skips the implicit choice issue of what one’s future place could be within that, vaguely defined, future state of affairs. Even if you shoot for the moon [and end up in an infinite and infinitely cold vacuum, among the stars but near-infinitely dwarfed by them] and miss, you may end up in a not-first but still pretty comfortable position; no hard feelings. … This, as an explication of what I’d call diverging predictions: Wide-ranging future states that you might ‘predict’ but most probably in a vocabulaire that will not be valid or understood in the future so traceability of your predictions is … quite close to zero hence your advance predictions have no worth ..! This of course is also in the book but still, too often not realised.

Now, let’s combine this with Maister’s Advisor let alone simple consultancy …

Oh well. Plus:
DSC_0324
[Predicting quality of resulting still wines … for second fermentation, mariage, and onwards — priceless; Ployez-Jacquemart]

Right. Explain.

Well, well, there we were, having almost swallowed all of the new EU General Data Protection Regulation to the … hardly letter, yet, and seeing that there’s still much interpretation as to how the principles will play out let alone the long-term (I mean, you’re capable of discussing 10+ years ahead, aren’t you or take a walk on the wild side), and then there’s this:

Late last week, though, academic researchers laid out some potentially exciting news when it comes to algorithmic transparency: citizens of EU member states might soon have a way to demand explanations of the decisions algorithms about them. … In a new paper, sexily titled “EU regulations on algorithmic decision-making and a ‘right to explanation,’” Bryce Goodman of the Oxford Internet Institute and Seth Flaxman at Oxford’s Department of Statistics explain how a couple of subsections of the new law, which govern computer programs making decisions on their own, could create this new right. … These sections of the GDPR do a couple of things: they ban decisions “based solely on automated processing, including profiling, which produces an adverse legal effect concerning the data subject or significantly affects him or her.” In other words, algorithms and other programs aren’t allowed to make negative decisions about people on their own.

The notice article being here, the original being tucked away here.
Including the serious, as yet very serious, caveats. But also offering glimpses of a better future (contra the title and some parts of the content of this). So, let’s all start the lobbies, there and elsewhere. And:
20141019_150840 (3)
[The classical way to protect one’s independence and privvecy; Muiderslot]

Turner in infosec

‘Cause you’re simply the best …

I call ping you when I need want you, my heart exploit toolkit‘s on fire
You come open your ports to me, come to me wild and wild open them one by one
When you come open to mey APT
Give me everything access I need
Give me a lifetime of promises covert access and a world of dreamorg secrets
Speak a language of love hapless victims like you know what it meansr worst dreams
And it can’t be wrong stopped
Take my heart packets and make it strong them hit baby

You’reve simply the best been hacked, better deeper than all the rest
Better Deeper than anyone, anyone I’ve ever met hacked
I’mve struck on in your the heart of your infra, and hang root on every word server you say owned
Tearing them us apart, baby I CISO you would rather be dead

In your heart systems I see the star of every night and every day clueless SOC underling chasin’ me
In your eyes On your monitors I get lost’m invisible, I get washed away no-one sees me
Just as long as I’m here I want to be in your arms systems
I could be in no better easier place

You’reve simply the best been hacked, better deeper than all the rest
Better Deeper than anyone, anyone I’ve ever met hacked
I’mve struck on in your the heart of your infra, and hang root on every word server you say owned
Tearing them us apart, baby I CISO you would rather be dead

Each time you leave try to trace me I start losing control morph out of sight
You’re walking away bumbling through systems with my heart and my soule all the rights
I can feel see you even when I’m alone you can’t me see
Oh baby, don’t let go brick your entire infra for me

Hm. Maybe an improvement over this and certainly this … Maybe not.
Well, there:
20150917_155757
[Simple phone pic, don’t even know where. Ams, probably]

Local jargon

… Suddenly it struck me. In my usual rants against ‘governance’ as in many of my earlier blog posts, the non-existent airheaded formalities that stand in the way of real, not the deflated style of management, I forgot one piece:
The phrase makes sense only in (totalitarian [here I go again], calcifying) bureaucracies. There, the shuffling of empty labels has replaced actual management and ‘governance’ may be used as a placeholder (as said: empty, otherwise the label doesn’t apply fully) for the ‘management’ pastiche that is expected. Outside of those dinosaur organisations (heh, see this), no-one has any need, or place, or (need for) understanding of ‘governance’ and anything sycophanting towards it, will fail to achieve anything close to a positive contribution (though negative contributions, in stifle, overhead, disturbance of good business, may be wide spread). See a business/organisation dabbling in ‘governance’ babble, and you see failure ahead.

I’ll leave it there for you. With:
20150911_173937
[For no apparent reason, a whopping crazy car park; Amsterdam]

Plusquote, again

Well yes, another episode in the Plusquote saga:

Now you’re accusing me of optimism”

Which works well in these times of stale bureaucracies; is sought after for disruptive value and renewal. And, in general, is something one might aim for, in a way of Summer motto — weather be nice, weather be rain spells, one can attach a positive edge, mode, conclusion.

Also, for the latter:

[Unedited phone pic; giving light in a Larking building style (not -referenced!) atrium; Gemeentemuseum Den Haag]

Two EV extras

Whether it would be @ElonMusk himself or @BoredElonMusk or any of you to pick these up… Just putting them out (t)here, for your consideration:

First; there ‘was’ this CVT thing, back in the 80s/90s or so, that didn’t really take off the way it might have.
In particular, since it sounded so ridiculous when revving up/down beyond ‘normal’. Now, with much improved electronic/near-AI engine/car control (and travel/congestion forward-looking (AI) car/engine management), wouldn’t it be possible to apply CVT in a more sensible way, leading to (much) extended range on EVs ..?
We’re thinking small cars first, since the fully-automatic gearbox thing will still not pick up with aficionados except the few that keep silent and cannot stand the discomfort of switching gears in the traffic jams they’re invariably caught in — I mean, thus disclosing themselves as pitiful mediocre-management ‘staff’. But then, with smaller cars and such ‘fuel’ savings, smaller batteries may suffice hence making the total package viable..?

Second; I just learned that Teslas and other EVs are lousy caravan pullers ’cause, though the torque might make them perfectly suited, the acceleration slurps (huh?) the batteries empty way too quickly, leading to much insufficient range. When the caravaners hook up their cabins in particular for day-long travel…
Yes, this may not be a Tesla thing per se, as caravaners and T owners/drivers may be near-completely disjunct groups, but it goes for other, less-suspiciously electric vehicles as well. And caravanning may not be a big thing (anymore!) over in the USofA but still very much is, over here in Europe [disclaimer: I’m most certainly not into it].
Also, T is ‘rumoured’ to have this battery pack thing going on ..? So I wondered what the merits would be of building such packs in a way that they could be fit onto caravans, e.g., onto the adze’s (is that the right word …!?) that have some standardization, or make them easy-fits onto the most common caravan brands, and then either feed straight into the EV or be used as replenishments at stops/stop-overs. Or, just for caravan e-juice during stays anywhere e.g. at ‘campings’…?

Well, no thirds here. Whatever’itis breaking out. Plus:
DSC_0460
[When garages were meant to be beautiful; Porto — oh wait they still can be]

Maverisk / Étoiles du Nord